The URL for this article is http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/sven/scapegoat2.htm

www.tenc.net[Emperor's Clothes]

Slobodan Miloshevich: Key Symbol in a Great
Power Gameby Sven Olafsson [1-April-2001]

Introductory remarksby Jared Israel

The following article raises some
important points which are also discussed in Diana Johnstone's
article, "The Price Of Truth," at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/Johnstone/24th.htm
. These points concern the consequences for the Serbian people of
the arrest of Mr. Miloshevich. Because this issue is so
important, I wish to make a few points about the article, to
clarify the consensus of opinion at Emperor's Clothes.

Mr. Olafsson says that Mr.
Miloshevich "is today unpopular in his own country".
This view is commonly put forth in the West, but without evidence.

The only test we have of Mr. Miloshevich's
popularity is the September 23, 2000 election, where he ran for
Yugoslav President against Voyislav Koshtunitsa, who was backed
by 19 parties, and openly supported by U.S. and European leaders.

Miloshevich got 40% of the vote to Koshtunitsa's
49%, or, if you believe the claims of Koshtunitsa's organization,
a bit over 50%.

However, close to 40% of eligible voters did not
vote. That is, a plurality failed to vote.

Since the DOS parties backing Koshtunitsa posed
this election as do-or-die, it is reasonable to assume that most
of the non-voters were Serbian patriots who didn't want to vote
for Mr. Miloshevich on the first round but who were horrified by
Mr. Koshtunitsa's immense financial support from the U.S. It is
quite possible that Mr. Miloshevich would have closed the 10% gap
in a runoff election. We shall never know because DOS created
provocations intended to prevent a runoff - and destroyed the
September 23 ballots when they sacked the Yugoslav Parliament
building. Was this a coincidence? I don't think so.

Please consider the circumstances surrounding the
Sept. 23 vote. First, the U.S. had created an entire
organizational and media apparatus inside Yugoslavia, involving
thousands of people, with the sole purpose of politically
isolating Mr. Miloshevich. As you may not be aware, most Serbian
media was financed by Western, anti-Miloshevich sources. Add to
that the anti-Miloshevich propaganda from the BBC, CNN, etc.,
which are watched in Yugoslavia.

Second, the US, England, Germany and Norway (and
perhaps other countries) poured vast sums into Yugoslavia to
finance the Koshtunitsa forces. The impact of this money was a
hundred times greater than it would have been in the U.S.,
because in Yugoslavia a person is lucky if they earn $75 (U.S.) a
month and because many young people simply cannot find jobs. We
don't yet know, and may never know, the real total of this money,
but it is reasonable to think in terms of several hundred million
dollars. To make a reasonable (but understated) comparison,
imagine the impact of BILLIONS of dollars on a U.S. presidential
election.

Third, the opposition promised to end
Yugoslavia's isolation, to end sanctions and to secure foreign
aid - all desired by ordinary people. Moreover, the West not only
agreed to do these things if Koshtunitsa was elected, but it also
promised that harsh measures would follow if Miloshevich won.
This threat was backed by the ostentatious maneuvers of the U.S.
6th Fleet, in coordination with the anti-Serbian Croatian
military, right before and during the elections.

And remember, the elections occured while NATO
occupied the Serbian province of Kosovo, with U.S.-armed and
trained terorrists attacking inner Serbia.

Given these immense Fifth Column and external
pressures, it is remarkable that Mr. Miloshevich did so well.
Imagine if these pressures were applied to an incumbent in the U.S.
How many votes would he or she get?

I was in Serbia for a week, from March 20 to
March 27th. I had the honor of speaking at a rally of some 50,000
people called by the Socialist Party to commemorate the bombing
of Yugoslavia, which began March 24, 1999. The audience was
politically sophisticated, overwhelmingly workers and farmers,
very passionate and very brave - for you must remember, Serbia
has been through a fascist-like coup. People told me of being
fired from their jobs and beaten for speaking their mind, or, in
one case, for writing a critical letter to Koshtunitsa.

On every street you see billboards with
Miloshevich's face staring down, like the face of the arch-demon
Goldstein in Orwell's book, '1984', with the words underneath
'WHO IS GUILTY?" The media is entirely monolithic, i.e.,
just like the U.S. media. Socialists and anti-DOS nationalists
rarely get their ideas on TV or into print. Most of the media
ignored the huge and important antiwar rally.

The Yugoslav economy is now functioning at 40% of
the (low) level at the time of the Oct. 5th coup. The country is
riddled with strikes - none of this is reported in the West. I
spoke to many people and over and over I heard the same thing:
people who voted for Koshtunitsa feel they fell for a scam.

Therefore the notion that Serbia has gone from
loving to hating Mr. Miloshevich is false. It is my opinion that
the DOS authorities launched the drive to arrest Miloshevich,
involving 10,000 police and the real possibility of a Chilean-type
attack on the Socialists, precisely because they are gaining
support and therefore the U.S. ordered DOS to nip this problem in
the bud. Will an anti-DOS government, perhaps made up of
Socialists and nationalists come to power? It is a real
possibility, if these forces champion national sovereignty and
social justice for working people and militantly expose current
"legal" attacks.

My second point concerns what Mr. Olafsson
says about the Hague Tribunal. I agree with him that it is a
phony court, set up to serve U.S. geopolitical interests - mainly
to terrorize and destroy the leaders of Serbian resistance.
Several articles on Emperor's Clothes deal with this.

But Mr. Olafsson writes:

"[The] existence of an instrument of political
inquisition, such as Hague 'tribunal', that can declare
someone 'illegal' at the will of a great power can lead to
creation of several parallel institutions. Each will be under
control of one or another great power. Breakdown of mutual
diplomatic recognition that is likely to follow will paralize
completely paralyze international relations. "

The problem is that this misses the main reality of our time:
that the United States Establishment is making a drive for world
domination. It is setting up Fifth Column organizations and media
in many countries. It is using terrorist proxy armies against the
Balkans and the Former Soviet Union. Nobody but the U.S., and its
European flunkies - for that is what they are - is about to set
up Hague-type Tribunals. The danger is not that the Hague will be
imitated by other superpowers, but rather that the "legal
standards" of the Hague, which come straight from the
Inquisition, will be applied all over the world as they are right
now being applied in Serbia, as exemplified by the U.S.-ordered
arrest of Mr. Milosevich.
- Jared Israel

Slobodan Miloshevich: Key Symbol in a Great
Power Gameby Sven Olafsson

Slobodan Miloshevich is demanded for sacrifice by the West for
three reasons: to justify and vindicate NATO aggression of 1999,
to confirm to the world the "special guilt" of the
Serbs in the Balkan conflicts of 1990s, and to make a precedent
for dealing with political enemies in the future.

It would be unnecessary to mention the obvious in the
beginning, but I want to point out that 99% of what matters in
international politics is power. Reader who disagrees with this
will probably disagree with what follows; and it is not the goal
here to persuade anyone in the truthfulness of my statement. Firm
believers in the prevalence of human rights and humanitarian
concerns in the thinking of governments; those who believe the
power and significance of international institutions; who believe
in the infinite righteousness and morality of the West and
immorality and perversity of the rest of the world, -- these
people are either na´ve, blind, or fanatical. They probably need
not read further.

The Scapegoat

The name of Slobodan Miloshevich is probably one of the most
frequently mentioned in connection with the Balkan conflicts of
the last decade. Over the years he was accused of all imaginable
sins -- from cynical exploitation of "radical nationalism"
and financial fraud to the very serious charges of war crimes,
including organisation of genocide. Virtually all of these
accusations (including those concerning purely domestic issues,
such as economic crimes) have been voiced exclusively in the
West, and picked up in Yugoslavia only by the most radical
opposition whose ties with Western governments and secret
services have long ago become openly acknowledged.

These accusations were in line with the overall campaign of
demonizing Serbs and their leadership, which was an integral part
of US military-political policy in the Balkans. However, while
accusations of domestic crimes were made in part to influence
Miloshevich's standing at home, the farcical indictment by the
Hague "tribunal" has different aims. It basically puts
Yugoslavia and its people into a position, where they are facing
a choice of accepting or not accepting the role of culprits and
the image of demons, and recognizing or not recognizing NATO's
right to attack their country.

The matter is not about merits and faults of Miloshevich; it
is not about whether he should be considered a saint or a demon;
it's not about whether he is honest or not. One may have
different attitudes towards Miloshevich, but one thing stands
clear: if the people of Yugoslavia respect themselves; if they do
not want to vindicate the crimes of the NATO aggressors; if they
do not want to agree and take upon themselves the role of the
main culprit in the Balkans pushed on them during the last 10
years by the West; and if they don't want to carry the economic
burden of the aggressor (reparations, individual claims, etc.)
they should never let Miloshevich become the scapegoat, a kind of
sacrificial lamb, that is to be given in exchange for some vague
"benevolence" of the superpower and its allies, and
forgotten forever.

The Reasons

The Balkan policies of the West culminated in an outright war
of Spring 1999, a war that was fought in contravention of
international law, and whose perpetrators, far from being called
to responsibility, continue to occupy high positions in their
countries or international bodies. Realistically, of course, they
will never be called to responsibility. And realistically, the
Hague Tribunal would mean nothing were it not a political
institution with the full weight of the world's only superpower
behind it. It is understood that this tribunal, nominally created
by the UN and ironically recognized by Yugoslavia itself, is a
powerful instrument in the hands of those who own it. While the
powerful states can violate international law and, thanks to
their excellent system of propaganda, persuade public and
official international opinion that they did not violate it, the
small countries are constrained by the distribution of power, to
submit to pressures of the great powers. Yugoslavia showed that
even a small country can put a great resistance to a devastating
aggression by the largest military alliance in the world. But it
also became obvious that this resistance cannot be sustained for
long. In this respect, it is perfectly understandable that today,
after devastation and with the new hopes for reconstruction and
national revival, many in Yugoslavia are tempted to cooperate
with the Hague institution. This would be one of the gravest
mistakes.

The "indictment" of Miloshevich was a purely
political act that took place at the moment, when NATO badly
needed justification for what was becoming an embarrassing
campaign of violence against Yugoslavia, and as it became ever
more difficult to misinform their domestic and international
public opinion of the situation in the region. Taking to account
that since the time the war ended and NATO-led forces entered
Kosovo-Metohija, more and more revelations about the true aims,
nature, and consequences of that war become known to the wider
public, leadership of the alliance and its members continuously
looks for a way to vindicate the aggression. Slobodan
Miloshevich, a formerly powerful leader who suddenly lost power
and is today unpopular in his own country is the perfect target,
especially since he had been demonized by the West during the
decade. Thus, the first negative effect of extradition of
Miloshevich would be vindication of NATO crimes, a de facto
justification of its policies against Yugoslavia. Giving up
Miloshevich would be equivalent to recognizing that the cause of
the war was inside Yugoslavia, and that NATO had to take
legitimate steps in response to an alleged aggression and war
crimes. Vindication of NATO's actions would effectively mean the
end of Yugoslavia's chance to successfully press for justice any
time in the future. It will also mean effective abandonment of
Kosovo and Metohija.

The second negative effect -- potential extradition would mean
a de facto recognition by the Serbs of the role of the main and
almost only culprits for everything that happened in the former
Yugoslavia since its disintegration. The logic "Miloshevich
is evil and is a criminal; the Serbs elected Miloshevich;
therefore the Serbs are evil and have a collective criminal guilt"
would be used to reaffirm the previous claims to this effect; it
would make the demonization of Serbs during previous years
justified. The implications of this effect concern more than just
national honour and dignity; they can open the Pandora's box for
future moral, material, and potentially territorial claims, the
disastrous consequences of which and implications for the
existence of the Serbian nation are too obvious.

The third effect would be a de facto (and probably de jure)
recognition of the right of the powerful states to disregard the
sovereignty of Yugoslavia (and other small states at that). Of
course, de facto, interference into small states' affairs has
existed for as long as the international system itself. But
Yugoslavia is a country whose sovereignty has been disregarded so
blatantly and on so many occasions in the last 10 years, despite
strong resistance that today, voluntarily letting others
interfere into Yugoslav internal affairs and disrespect the legal
system, would mean a drastic loss of sovereignty. It would also
would open way to further interference, on ever-increasing scale.

Most importantly, a precedent would be created for dealing
with foreign political enemies, with potentially devastating
consequences for the system of diplomatic international norms.
Diplomatic recognition has been making possible the preservation
of some fundamental level of trust that are critical for conduct
of any international dealings and negotiations even during the
worst conflicts between states. Existence of an instrument of
political inquisition, such as Hague "tribunal" that
can declare someone "illegal" at the will of a great
power can lead to creation of several parallel institutions. Each
will be under control of one or another great power. Breakdown of
mutual diplomatic recognition that is likely to follow will
paralize completely paralyze international relations.

Dozens of new government officials in today's Yugoslavia,
under direct influence of the West, are so eager to disregard all
these factors, and so fanatical about cooperation with the "international
community" that there can be no mistake that they defend not
the interests of their country and their people, but are
satisfying their ideological beliefs, labouring for the money
they have been paid by the Western governments, finally releasing
their personal hate for Miloshevich, if nothing else. Recent
history teaches that a blind embracing of a new ideology, while
disregarding reality and being idealistic about others'
intentions, can lead to disappointment, failure, and humiliation.
Experiences of Russia and Ukraine in the 1990s show this very
well.

Arresting and sacrificing Miloshevich might bring in some
money. It might bring some words of approval ("Good boy!"
persistently comes to mind). But what else? Nothing, apart from
immense humiliation and a deep sense of shame that will be there
sooner or later, and will be haunting the Serbs for generations
to come.

***

We may be free but we do need
money...

Emperor's Clothes does not charge a subscription
fee. But of course nothing is free.

We rely mainly on volunteer labor. Nevertheless
there are plenty of bills. For example, the cost of Lexis, our
search engine, has doubled. Lexis is the best method of rapidly
locating news stories from several thousand sources over the past
twenty years. It is probably the best political research tool
ever available. But now it costs twice as much.

We rely on our readers for contributions. If you
like what we're trying to do, please help.